The article suggests that the accident was caused by driver error, initially when the driver crossed over the center line and then again when the driver apparently over-corrected and ended up driving off of the road.

Over-correcting is a fairly common cause of very serious accidents. It often happens in two scenarios. First, in a case like this when a driver crosses over the center line and then overreacts by sharply turning the wheel back and the car goes off of the road. The other common situation occurs when a vehicle drives off of the road onto the shoulder and over-corrects and drives into the oncoming lane.

Sometimes, the latter scenario is made worse when the ground next to the road is dirt, grass or some other soft shoulder and there is a dropoff of a couple of inches or more between the road and the shoulder. The tires that have left the road are adjacent to the dropoff making it difficult for the driver to get back on the road. If the driver turns the steering wheel just a little expecting to get the tires back on the road and that is unsuccessful, many times the driver will panic and turn sharply which gets the tires back on the road but puts the car at an angle facing the oncoming lane. Head-on accidents at high speeds often result. If the driver is unable to get the vehicle back on the road with a steadier turn of the steering wheel, the best thing to do is to slow down on the shoulder and come to a stop or come to a slower speed where it is easier to drive back onto the road. Sharp turns back onto the road will often lead to very serious accidents.

It is not clear from the article exactly how this incident occurred, i.e. whether the woman was crossing at a cross walk, in heavy traffic, with or against a traffic light, etc. However, even where a pedestrian, particularly an older pedestrian or one who is disabled, is crossing the road, it is imperative for drivers to look out for and avoid them if at all possible. We have seen other tragic accidents in Jacksonville where children pedestrians did not have time to cross the street before the walk signal changed and were struck by vehicles.

Beach Boulevard, where this crash occurred, is a busy road with many lanes. There are also many pedestrians that walk along and across that road. In the context of a personal injury or wrongful death lawsuit, when a serious accident like this occurs, wrongful death lawyers for the family of the deceased will make every effort to investigate the crash and hold the driver accountable if it is determined that he/she should have seen the pedestrian and avoided her regardless of where and how the victim was crossing the road.

Even more dangerous than people driving cars and sending or receioving text messages is people driving semi trucks while sending and receiving text messages. The Department of Transportation has recently announced a new regulation that prohibits commercial truck drivers and bus drivers from driving while using a text messaging device or a handheld cell phone. This is an important regulation that will hopefully prevent people driving the most dangerous vehicles on the road from being distracted by mobile communication devices.

Although it is not clear from the article what evidence suggests that the accident was the bicyclist's fault, the fact that the driver of the vehicle fled the scene leads one to believe that the accident may not have been completely the fault of the bicyclist, or perhaps the vehicle driver was impaired. Whenever someone is involved in an accident that results in an injury, that person is obligated by law to stop and provide his/her insurance and contact information. Failure to remain at the scene after an accident is a crime in Florida, and it is a serious felony crime if someone is seriously injured as a result of the accident.

The article in this case suggests that the bicyclist was at fault for the crash by driving into traffic. However, why the vehicle driver left the scene is an important question that would need to be answered in a personal injury lawsuit if that driver was ever located. If the vehicle driver was impaired by alcohol or drugs, was him/herself driving recklessly or was doing something else improper, fault for the accident and responsibility for the damages may be partially, or almost completely, attributed to the vehicle driver.

We have discussed the dangers of people driving while talking on their cell phones, or worse, sending or receiving text messages and emails. Unfortunately, the practice of using cell phones and other more diverse mobile communication devices seems to be increasing.

It is unclear in this case how the police officer knew the driver was text messaging someone when the crash occurred. However, in personal injury and wrongful death cases, there are several ways the personal injury/wrongful death lawyer for the plaintiff can determine if the other driver was using a cell phone or text messaging device prior to the crash. The police officer who responds to the scene can notice an active mobile communication device when he/she investigates the crash and the accident report should indicate that cell phone use or text messaging was a factor, witnesses to the crash can testify that they saw the driver using the cell phone or was otherwise distracted prior to the crash or cell phone records can show if the device was in use around the time of the crash.

As more and more people get cell phones and other devices that have a variety of communication applications, we are likely to see more of these types of crashes due to the dangers of driving and using such devices at the same time.

In a wrongful death case resulting from a tragic accident like this, there are several factors to look at to determine why this incident occurred and who is responsible. A wrongful death attorney would look, of course, into why the beverage cart fell. Was it placed on the lift improperly? Was it safe to have this particular beverage on this particular lift? Was the lift properly inspected and maintained? Did someone place the cart on the lift so that it was a latent danger for Mr. Curry to work on the beverage cart?

In a serious wrongful death case involving heavy equipment such as this one, there may be many possible factors indicating that one or more parties were negligent and responsible for the tragic death.

The kid whole stole the SUV and caused the crash and resulting injuries was only 14 years old. It is unlikely that he has any money to compensate the victims for their injuries, but like just about every personal injury case, the key is how much insurance coverage is available for the injured victims. When the at-fault driver is a teenager who stole a car and caused injuries, what are the insurance issues? It is unlikely that the teenaged driver has his own insurance policy, although that is always the first place to look. However, his parents or other family member with whom he lives may have insurance that covers him directly or indirectly. So, a personal injury attorney would always look to family members and/or others who live with the teenaged driver to check their insurance policies.

Normally, in Florida the owner of a vehicle involved in a traffic crash is liable for injuries caused as a result of a crash involving his/her vehicle. However, if the owner can show that his/her vehicle was stolen and the driver did not have his/her permission to drive the vehicle when the crash occurred, the owner's insurance policy would not cover the crash and the owner would not be liable for the damages.

Finally, the injured parties themselves may also look to their own insurance companies for compensation from the crash. Each insured driver has the option of purchasing uninsured or underinsured motorist coverage to cover them if they are injured by a driver who has no insurance or has an insurance policy that does not fully cover the damages. In fact, each person who buys liability auto insurance must specifically be offered uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage and decide whether to accept it or reject it. If a person accepts that coverage or is never offered that insurance coverage, he/she will have uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage that is available to compensate him/her in the event of a crash where the at-fault driver is uninsured or does not have sufficient insurance coverage to cover the damages from the accident.

Assuming the report is considered privileged and the lawyer for the defense in a personal injury or wrongful death lawsuit refuses to produce it, there are ways for the plaintiff's lawyer to overcome the privilege and obtain the report. This work product privilege can be overcome if the plaintiff's lawyer can show that the plaintiff needs the information in the report and the plaintiff cannot obtain such information without undue hardship. For instance, if the report has important information about the incident and what caused it, the first part of the test can be fairly easy to establish. However, how does the plaintiff's lawyer establish that he/she cannot obtain the information from another source without undue hardship? One or more of the following factors might help: if the report contains information about the incident that only the company employees would know yet they are not available or unreliable for whatever reason, if there were no other witnesses to the incident other than company employees have since died or cannot be located, if the plaintiff was injured to the extent that he/she cannot recall the events surrounding the incident or the victim died as a result of the accident. Those are some scenarios where the plaintiff's attorney can establish a need for the information and an inability to obtain the information any other way.

Companies and their lawyers will often refuse to produce an incident report that has important details about the incident and subsequent injuries or death that would be helpful to the plaintiff. There is a privilege that may allow the company lawyer to refuse to produce the report, however, there are also effective legal arguments that can overcome the privilege and force the defense lawyer to produce the report.

However, there are electronic devices that can be installed onto the tractor trailer that can monitor and record driving hours automatically without relying on a semi truck driver's input. These electronic on board recorders (EOBR) can monitor the exact number of hours and miles a semi truck and driver are driving, along with many other data. There is a rule being proposed by the FMCSA which would encourage voluntary installation of the EOBR's for every semi truck driver and make them mandatory for two years for all semi truck drivers who have a history of inaccurate or improper hours of service records.

Because serious traffic accidents caused by semi truck drivers who have driven too long in violation of federal regulations and are fatigued is a serious problem, any rule which establishes an independent method of recording the number of hours semi truck drivers are on the roads and help enforces the hours of service regulations is a good idea.

How do personal injury and wrongful death attorneys determine who is at fault in a chain reaction crash involving multiple vehicles? Chain reaction crashes typically involve at least one vehicle crashing into another vehicle that has stopped for traffic or some other reason. The vehicle that was struck then crashes into other cars that have been stopped. Obviously, the first driver who caused the initial crash will likely bear some, most or all of the responsibility for the crash. However, other vehicle drivers in the line of vehicles may also bear some responsibility for the crash and resulting injuries. Questions should be asked regarding how much space each driver left between his/her vehicle and the one in front of them. Did any of those drivers react in a way that made the crash worse?

In chain reaction crashes and crashes involving multiple vehicles, there are often more than one driver who share liability for the crash and injuries. There are also often many witnesses whose versions of the crash differ. It is important to get as much information as possible about all of the vehicles and factors involved in the traffic accident, not just the first driver who starts the multi-vehicle crash.

The majority of serious injuries and deaths caused by falling furniture involve televisions, particularly the older model TV's which can be very heavy and are often front heavy. Many of these TV's were designed in such a way that they can be easily tipped over or can easily slide off a surface despite their heavy weight. This allows young kids to more easily tip them over and forward by playing with the TV or climbing on a cabinet or dresser where the TV sits. Most of the serious injuries and deaths caused by falling TV's involve children under the age of 4.

There are things people can do to reduce the risk of a heavy TV falling on a child. First, all TV's in the house should be located to determine if they are in an unsafe location where they can be easily tipped over or they are sitting on unstable furniture that is not designed to hold the TV. There are TV stands for sale that are designed to safely hold TV's and make it very difficult for young children to tip them over. Anchoring the TV to the wall is also helpful in stabilizing a TV so that it will not tip over from the TV stand. Heavy and tall furniture, such as dressers, should also be anchored to the wall to prevent them from falling over when a child climbs on them to reach something on a higher shelf.

In a personal injury or wrongful death lawsuit resulting from a serious traffic accident like this, a lot of time and resources will go into attributing blame for the crash and the resulting injuries and death. When a person injured or killed in a traffic crash is not wearing a seat belt, the insurance company lawyers will always argue that the damages recoverable in the lawsuit should be significantly reduced due to the injured party's negligence in failing to wear a seat belt. They will hire an expert to say that if the person had been wearing the seat belt, they either would not have been injured at all or would have been injured much less severely. Personal injury/wrongful death lawyers for the plaintiff can also hire an expert to show that wearing a seat belt would not have made a major difference in the crash, but the issue can become an obstacle to a full recovery.

Keep in mind that the law requires all front seat occupants to wear a seat belt. Additionally, all occupants under 18 must wear a seat belt, or be secured in a child restraint, no matter where they are in the vehicle. However, even if the law does not require adults in the back seat to wear a seat belt, if an adult in the back seat does not wear a seat belt and gets injured or killed in an accident, the insurance company for the other driver will argue that his/her damages should be reduced due to the negligent failure to wear a seat belt. The safer course of action is for everyone to wear a seat belt at all times in any vehicle.

This kind of traffic accident brings up an issue that arises from time to time in personal injury and wrongful death lawsuits. Although no one was apparently injured as a result of the crash in this case and there is no evidence that foul play was involved, there are traffic crashes and resulting lawsuits where the driver who caused the crash claims that he/she suffered from some sort of medical problem or prescription drug reaction immediately prior to the crash. This kind of defense is asserted to avoid responsibility for the accident and resulting injuries by claiming the accident was out of their control. However, these defenses are rarely valid. In personal injury cases, we have seen where defendants who have used these excuses are apparently up and walking around and seemingly fine immediately after the accident when the police arrive. It is hardly credible for a person to say that they "blacked out" just before the crash but were fine minutes before the crash and immediately afterwards.

Additionally, it is also highly suspect when a person claims that a medical condition or drug reaction occurred for the first time immediately before the crash with no prior notice. It is one thing for a person to establish that they did in fact have some medical problem immediately prior to the crash which caused the crash. If they are able to do that, that driver must also prove that the medical problem or drug reaction was unforeseeable. In other words, if the person had a prior diagnosis or warning from a doctor or was given a prescription drug with warnings about driving while taking the drug, they cannot successfully argue that they could not foresee the possibility of the medical problem or reaction occurring while driving. On the contrary, personal injury/wrongful death lawyers for the injured party or the family of the person who died in the crash can use this information to show that the driver was not only negligent in his/her actual driving but was also negligent by getting in the car in the first place after being warned of the dangers of a possible medical problem or drug reaction.

According to the article, the mother and her two children were crossing San Jose Boulevard with the proper walk signal, but the signal changed and the SUV had a green light before they could reach the other side of San Jose Boulevard. The article did not provide any further details, and it is unclear who was at fault for the tragic accident, and death and injuries that resulted.

In a traffic crash involving a vehicle and pedestrians, when determining fault for the crash, the first place to look is the traffic signals. However, even where the pedestrians do not have the walk signal (or green light) or they are crossing where there is no crosswalk, the vehicle driver can still be partially, or primarily, at fault for the crash. Even where the vehicle has the green light, particularly when the light has just turned green, it is the responsibility of the driver to make sure there are no pedestrians in the road. Because of the vulnerable nature of pedestrians, vehicle drivers must be extra careful to watch out for them even when the vehicles have the green light and the right of way. It is not uncommon to see situations where people with kids, people who are injured/disabled or people who are elderly cannot cross the road completely in the time it takes for the walk signal or green light to stay illuminated. This is particularly true for streets with several lanes going in each direction like San Jose Blvd. In such cases, regardless of the green light and the right of way, it is important for vehicle drivers to look out for pedestrians at busy intersections, particularly a mother and two children. The failure of a driver to properly look out for others can result in liability for a driver in a personal injury or wrongful death lawsuit even where a driver has the right of way.

Semi truck drivers are not only charged with driving safely while on the roads but making sure they are safe when they have to make stops. A semi truck pulling back into the road in the early morning hours can pose as much of a danger to other vehicles as any other time while driving at highway speeds. Some questions to look at in this situation are whether the semi truck that pulled into the road was properly marked so other drivers could see it in the darkness. Tractor trailers, especially the trailers, can be very difficult for other drivers to see if not marked properly. Additionally, because semi trucks take longer to build speed, they must have more space before they can pull out from a stopped position on the side of the road. How much space did this semi truck driver have before pulling out in front of Mr. Rentas? The article suggests that the answer may be: not enough. Additionally, what was the malfunction that caused the semi truck driver to stop in the first place? If it was something that could and should have been resolved during the pre-trip check of the vehicle, this accident may have been completely avoidable.